Uihlein Challenges Nicklaus, USGA/R&A

Rick Young

Rick Young

Jack Nicklaus’ comments this week on the United States Golf Association (USGA) and Royal & Ancient (R&A) supposedly in the home stretch of a proposed roll back of the modern golf ball — including a specific reference to Titleist — has drawn a terse albeit respectful response from Acushnet’s Wally Uihlein.

During Nicklaus’ annual Tuesday news conference at the Honda Classic in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla., the 18-time major champion said he had dinner with USGA executive director Mike Davis last Sunday, who briefed him on where the governing body currently is on a golf ball roll back.

By Davis’ alleged comments shared by the Golden Bear below, it seems the prospects for this happening in the short term have escalated from the ‘if’ to ‘when’ stage.

“Mike said, ‘We’re getting there. We’re going to get there.’ He said, ‘I need your help when we get there,’” explained Nicklaus to a crowded room of media members. “I said, ‘That’s fine. I’m happy to help you.’ I said, ‘I’ve only been yelling at you for 40 years.’ 1977 is the first time I went to the USGA. I said, ‘I assume you’re going to study for another 10 years or so though. He says, ‘Oh, no, no, no. We’re not going to do that.’ He says, ‘I think we’re getting closer to agreements with the R&A and be able to do some things and be able to help,’ because the R&A has been. . . sort of doesn’t want to do anything. I’m hoping that’s going to happen. I’ve talked to Mike a lot. Mike’s been very optimistic about wanting to get something done but hasn’t been able to get there yet.”

Seeking a response to this and other matters coming out of the Nicklaus presser, I reached out to Uihlein Wednesday evening. Acushnet’s former president and chief executive officer, who stepped down from his position on January 1, 2018 to assume an advisory role on behalf of Acushnet chairman Gene Yoon, remains the organization’s point person on the issue, which he calls the “golf ball goes too far nonsense.”

Not surprisingly, Uihlein was steadfast in his perspective after reading Nicklaus’ interview transcript. Immediately, and in no uncertain terms, Uihlein also called out the USGA and R&A. He added that a procedure, mutually agreed on by the OEM’s and governing bodies seven years ago, remains in place and is supposed to be binding on both sides.

At least to the best of his knowledge.

“Mike Davis has not told us (Acushnet) that he is close (there is the Vancouver Protocol of 2011 that we had assumed was in force) and he has not asked us for help if and when he gets there,” said Uihlein.

*Note: The Vancouver Protocol was a document that came out of a closed-door USGA and R&A forum with equipment manufacturers in Vancouver back in November, 2011. It was meant to assist with transparency to any proposed equipment rules changes or testing procedures while allowing participation of the OEM’s to the process.

Nicklaus has long advocated rolling back the golf ball as a practical counter measure for distance on today’s professional tours. In the past he has been quoted as wanting to leave modern technology in place for recreational golfers but, of late, has not been as forthcoming with this particular position. It is no secret that the USGA and R&A are not in favour of a rules bifurcation or having two sets of rules — one for pros and one for amateurs — governing any aspect of the game. That includes equipment (it should be noted that there is already bifurcation with respect to wedge grooves).

That said, Nicklaus, answering specifically to a question from writer Alex Miceli, thinks Titleist should be commercially fine with a USGA/R&A roll back of the ball. He even quantified how far he thinks that should go.

“I don’t understand why Titleist would be against it,” the 78-year-old continued. “I know they are, but I don’t understand why you would be? They make probably the best product, and if they make the best product, whether it’s 20 per cent shorter, what difference would it make? Their market share isn’t going to change a bit. They are still going to dominate the game,” he said.

Perhaps the case but Uihlein was having none of it. He challenged Nicklaus on his estimated percentage decrease and what that would mean to various golfer types, including me.

“Let’s look at a 20 per cent reduction then,” Uihlein said. “Tony Finau is currently averaging 327 yards on tour. With a 20 per cent contraction of the ball, he would be hitting it 261 yards. Martin Piller is currently averaging 293 yards. With a 20 per cent contraction, he will be hitting it 234 yards. And how about Rick Young? Today, he is hitting it about 230 yards. With a 20 per cent contraction, you will be hitting it 184 yards.”

As an extension of Nicklaus’ point, the Golden Bear believes too that a shorter golf ball will have an immediate and profound impact on the amount of time it takes to play. This was a recurring theme in his media briefing.

Here is one of those points:

“The game takes too long,” Nicklaus stated. “The golf ball is the biggest culprit of it. I mean, if you took a golf course we played, we used to play courses 6,500 yards, 6,600 yards and that was a championship golf course,” he said. “Today you’re at 7,500 or 7,600 yards. The older golf courses, the tees, the greens, were very close together. The golf courses built today, they spread them out for real estate purposes.

Uihlein, as you might imagine, is not in this camp.

“It appears from the press conference that Mr. Nicklaus was blaming slow play on technology and the golf ball in particular,” he said. “I don’t think anyone in the world believes that the golf ball has contributed to the game’s pace of play issues.”

Turning back to the governing bodies, Uihlein was also critical of USGA and R&A sites currently being used to host major championships. With a degree of cynicism he pressed the ruling authorities on why courses that supposedly can no longer challenge the game’s best players remain preferred venues for the U.S. Open, the Open Championship and other high-profile events.

“It seems to me at some point in time that the media should be asking about the conflict of interest between the ruling bodies (and their assumed fiat to govern the game which is a noble pursuit) while at the same time conducting major championships on venues that maybe both the athletes and the technology have outgrown,” he said. “Because it is the potential obsolescence of some of these championship venues which is really at the core of this discussion.”

Nicklaus might well concur. During Tuesday’s press proceedings the Golden Bear also offered this rather surprising nugget:

“I think we only have one golf course in this country, in my opinion, that’s not obsolete to the golf ball and that’s Augusta National,” he said. “They are the only people that have enough money that have been able to keep the golf course and do the things you had to. They are even buying up parts of country clubs and roads and everything to get that done.”

Uihlein for quite some time has been advocating for some form of data or proof that supports how the golf ball has induced widespread harm to facilities or golfers. To date, he says, he and Titleist have not been forwarded anything of substance.

“There are no golf courses being closed due to the advent of evolving technology,” Uihlein said. “There is no talk from the PGA Tour and its players about technology making their commercial product less attractive. Quite the opposite, the PGA Tour revenues are at record levels. The PGA of America is not asking for a roll back of technology. The game’s every day player is not advocating a roll back of technology.”

That prompted Uihlein to throw the ball back into my court for one final thought.

“Perhaps the media,” he said, “should be asking, ‘If there is a problem, what is the problem?’”

Rick Young

EQUIP AND BIZ

Join Rick Young for what's new and what's happening in the world of golf equipment and business.

Ian Andrew
February 24, 2018 at 1:21 pm

Rick,
I would check the impact on all three players that he cites with someone other than Wally.
I could be wrong, but I thought the percentage of impact would be tied to swing speed.
Essentially Tony would loose the highest percentage and you would loose the least in his example.
And someone like my father would see almost no change …
Might be wrong, but worth checking to make sure, because this matters philisophically.
Ian

[…] In an interview with ScoreGolf on Friday, Uihlein reacted to Nicklaus’ assertions that the ball is responsible for contributing to a lot of the troubles the game faces today, from slow play and sagging participation to the soaring cost to play. […]

If you would like a amateur’s prospectus on where the game of golf stands in the recreational world I would love to give you my thoughts. I have been playing golf for aprox 35yrs. I have played in match play leagues, many tournaments and love the game of golf
and want to see it grow. I still work and in the winter can only play on the weekends. That makes every moment playing so .
To show you my passion I get up at 4:00 am on Saturday’s to be one of the first two or three groups out on the course in order to enjoy the pace of play golf was meant to be played. My handicap is 11 and I wish I had more time to practice in order to get down to single digits.
Joey Menichini
cell 213-491-1867

Is it just me that I’m interpreting Mr. Uihlein’s comments as somewhat contradictory? In one breath he states “There are no golf courses being closed due to the advent of evolving technology” while nonetheless indicating that tournament venues are becoming obsolete as technology has outgrown them.